A disheartening trend. I am hoping to hear feedback!

[sillong]

Recently there has been a trend in the martial arts practitioners, especially in styles that are classified as “internal” or “soft” to state that they practice for holistic and spiritual reasons but that they don’t believe in fighting and violence . Often times these individuals refuse to learn or teach the combat applications of their respective styles, stating that their personal beliefs (i.e. Buddhism, pacifism, etc.) prohibit them. They will even go so far as to deny that these violent applications are necessary to learning the whole art or reaping the holistic and spiritual benefits of their pursuit. Some even state the belief that internal styles have no martial application and that they never have.

The above paragraph is not to say that practitioners of “soft” or “internal” styles inherently prescribe to doctrines they have not fully investigated, nor does it mean that the majority of internal martial arts practitioners share this view. The point here is that people who hold the discussed beliefs tend to find refuge in internal styles both as students and teachers.

It is infuriating for me to bear witness to someone making claims under the guise of adherence to a specific spiritual or philosophical doctrine (such as Buddhism or Daoism), when it is obvious that they are either confused as to their understanding of the doctrine or have not investigated it in sufficient depth. I have little if any knowledge of pacifism and so will not talk about it further for the purposes of this argument. My understanding and practice of Buddhism is still in its infancy and so I will simply quote some of the Zen patriarchs and their famous students in order to illustrate my interpretation of the problem.

People will argue that they do not practice or teach the combat applications because it is forbidden by Buddhism to harm another living creature. This is truly stupid. Shaolin was considered one of the premier centers for advanced Buddhism as well as martial arts. While they were unique in that most Buddhist temples did not practice combat arts, they were not seen as heretics for their practice of the martial arts. Even at Shaolin their Buddhist studies came first so much so that it informed how they not only practiced but used their martial arts. Nowhere is this more important or evident than the famous shaolin admonition:

“Avoid rather than block, block rather than grab, grab rather than lock, lock rather than strike, strike rather than wound, wound rather than maim, maim rather then kill. For all life is sacred, and once destroyed can never be restored nor replaced this is the way of Shaolin.”

If one were to investigate the above admonition in only a cursory manner then it is entirely possible that they would still interpret it as prohibiting violence and by extension suggesting that learning martial techniques is not recommended. Let us look at some examples to see if this is in fact keeping with Shaolin’s famous decree.

In the first example a student spends many years training under a Tai Chi Chuan (Grand Ultimate Fist) teacher who doesn’t believe in instructing the combat applications. On the way home from practice he decides to take a shortcut and gets attacked by a masked assailant in an alley. The man has no weapon and says nothing. He simply strikes the young student and attempts to steal his wallet and personal valuables. The young student is so shocked and frightened that he doesn’t know whether this is a robbery, an assault, or something worse. Afraid for his life, the student fights back to the best of his untrained ability. The assailant overcompensates for the sudden escalation and kills the student. In this example Buddha would still be displeased. The student did not kill but he died because he did not treat his own life as sacred. If he had learned the techniques and acquired a level of martial proficiency the assailant might have been allowed to escape with a wound and the student would have lived. Buddhism would have prevailed, the student would have lived, and the life or the assailant would have been preserved thus honoring its sacred status. Furthermore, the assailant might have been left so shaken from the exchange that he would have determined that living this way was not worth the risk and thus attempted to change his ways. This would have saved untold others.

Now my critics will most likely state that while I have succeeded in mitigating evil for the time being I have only increased it in the future. The basic thrust of this counterargument is that while some assailants will be discouraged and change after the first encounter many will resort to more violent tactics like killing the intended victim and simply making off with the property. First of all this counterargument is rife with problems. First, the bandit/criminal that finds himself thwarted by a capable martial artist is most likely to never strike again. Theft like crime in general appeals to the individual looking for an easy profit or to the psychologically imbalanced personality, in which case they are not after your money but your life. If the potential marks are no longer easy targets then it is most likely that potential assailants will find a new scheme or get out of the game altogether. Second, the assailant most likely to get a firearm or weapon with the intention killing the next potential victim will fight back much harder and more viciously during the initial encounter than the average criminal. In this case it is highly possible that such an aggressive assailant will end up being wounded, maimed, or killed during the first encounter. Many martial artists hiding behind the skirt of Buddhism will say that this eventuality is unacceptable as killing is prohibited.

In this case there are two answers. First, train harder so that you can simply grab them, lock them, wound them, or maim them. The better you are, the more you can control the situation. As Dr. Yang Jwing Ming said, “In Chin Na it is necessary to be cruel to yourself in order to be kind to someone else.” This means that the practitioner that takes the time to try a more complicated technique like an immobilizing chin na technique rather than simply striking and possibly killing is assuming greater risk for themselves in the hope of saving both themselves and the criminal. The closer you and the assailant are in actual ability the more likely that one of you will have to die or be seriously injured in order to decide the conflict. Second, let us assume that you kill the assailant. In this case Buddha and the bodhisattvas weep for the thief’s death, but they will only weep once. In the event that the assailant kills you and finds that it works, Buddha will weep every time that the thief strikes.

Ultimately, however, the above conversation concerning what will happen after the second encounter is a pointless exercise. In the end you have very little to show for it. Buddhism teaches that one exists under heaven’s will and that the only moment that matters is the present while the past is gone and the future is still unseen. Therefore martial artists cannot make their decisions based on what the assailant might or might not do in the future, but they must ultimately decide what is right in the current moment. In short the right thing to do is to preserve life. This means you do everything you can to save yourself and your assailant. As Yagyu Munenori said, “The question is not about killing men or not killing men, it is about striking down evil.”

I would like to now return to my comment that many practitioners believe that not learning the combat applications of their style is insignificant to reaping the holistic and spiritual rewards offered by the martial arts. This being said, my question is this: If the combat applications and the debate over their use is inconsequential then how do they expect to address the above seeming contradictions and emerge with an unshakeable conviction in what is right. I know that for me my spiritual foundation is much deeper because I meditated on that which seemed to contradict my Buddhist beliefs. I now feel free to act, and understand that compassion and mercy cannot be considered absolute regardless of context. Rather they are absolute within a larger relative context.

[msg]

i think you sayed every thing you can about it ..i have to agree 100 percent i do hsing,i witch dates one of the oldies arts it has its health aspects but it is for fighting ..like all internal arts .teachers that teach internal arts with out the fighting part of it is really cheating there students.basicly all internal arts was so that every thing is in harmony so your chi will flow so you can put it to your jing when fighting ..and not break your self down in the long run .by keeping evry thing in your body alined and working right ..so for people to say that internal is just for healyh are sadly mistaken

[SevenStar]

1. the majority of people don't start training in order to learn to fight.

2. sticking to your example, his dying doesn't show that he doesn't view life as sacred. he did try to fight, afterall. in some cases, your skill just isn't enough to save you.

however, this trend really isn't anything new. as stated above, not everyone wants to be a fighter.

[SanHeChuan]

1. the majority of people don't start training in order to learn to fight.

When you take the fight out of the martial arts then all the associated benefits are diminished. So, if your serious about health and character, it's better to fight. :p

[David Jamieson]

Imo

the greater majority of people who are in martial arts schools aren't fighters anyway.

if people wanna learn the arts without having to punch anyone or be punched, that's cool.
they can't do that at my place, but they can do it where they like. :)

[SPJ]

for every thesis; there is an anti thesis. sort of yin and yang.

for every qin na, there is a solution or anti qin na.

when you are qin na with both hands, you are also susceptible to be attacked.

you use your hands to qin and na thus not available to do something else such as defend your self.

--

for every move; there is a countermove or more than one counters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_yWn1oy-Xk&NR=1

--

[SPJ]

when you study and practice fighting skills/techniques, you study and practice how to defend your self or neutralize attacks toward you and counter attack.

that is it.

your religion, personal belief, discipline, ethics etc

have nothing to do with it.

your intent is.

--

intent to harm, intent to neutralize and control the opponent, how you "end" the fight etc.

--

[SanHeChuan]

Are you trying to arrange every post in to a Haiku or something? WTF, speak PROSE man!

[SPJ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZlNWOk5kRvI

no ma intent at all.

relaxation. focusing on no focusing. way of walking meditation.--

:confused: :D :eek: :)

[SPJ]

Are you trying to arrange every post in to a Haiku or something? WTF, speak PROSE man!

yes. indeed.

:D

[SPJ]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1F6UI7GtQI&mode=related&search=

for some. it is fitnese and work out.

again no fighting intent.

:D

[golden arhat]

for every thesis; there is an anti thesis. sort of yin and yang.

for every qin na, there is a solution or anti qin na.

when you are qin na with both hands, you are also susceptible to be attacked.

you use your hands to qin and na thus not available to do something else such as defend your self.

--

for every move; there is a countermove or more than one counters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_yWn1oy-Xk&NR=1

--

somwetimes its better if u just stop talking man

other wise
try and get your point across in english

[SPJ]

1. yes. the point is that;

the clip showed 2 man drill or moves and countermoves.

it does not matter who they are (italiano, moslem chinese/hui--) or what they believe (roman catholic or islam)--

they are studying and practicing fightings.

meaning religions and what they believe have nothing to do with what they are doing/learning how to fight.
--

2. if you have a gun to defend yourself, you may shoot the leg or shoot the opponent's hand holding the weapon assumming it is not gun.--

--

or if you are hunting, do you use enough force to disable the game or shoot to "kyll". or a trap etc etc.

there is a difference that if you hunt and fish to eat or pleasure etc etc.

my point is that it is the intent that needed to be discussed. and not the gun or the shooting methods.

3. if people use Tai Chi or any CMA as an exercise or work out, they do not care about fighing aspects. there is nothing wrong with that.

:D

[PangQuan]

I agree SPJ

everything in context. For some people fighting will never be an element. To try and say that these people should not enjoy the aspects that can benefit them from thing such as Tai Chi, would be quite selfish.


on a side note, i find the method of SPJ's posts often refreshing, inclining one to think further and develope more of an answer within themsleves rather than having one blankly state thier opinions or methods.


confucius said that when he teaches a man, he will often give him 1/4 of an answer and if that man cannot go away himself and bring back the other 3/4, he would no longer teach that man.


its kind of along the same lines.

i guess you just have to look for the training where you can find it.

[The Willow Sword]

So Silong, Do you only draw from the combat aspects of these "soft" "internal" Arts?

If so then why begrudge those who do not wish to draw from those aspects? True that there are teachers out there who totally dismiss the fighting elements of the internal systems,but there is a culture of older people who have long since grown up from wanting to fight and all they wish to do is maintain health and vitality.
Ive studied the internal fighting systems and the esoteric forms of maintaining your health and vitality. I am through with the fighting aspects of these arts and pursue the healing aspects, this is my path. I am no pacifist(as others will attest here on the forum), true that i find fighting in tourneys and UFC and all that to be a complete waste of time and energy, i do not dismiss it( i even like to watch it at times,unfortunately)

If someone wishes to only pursue the "spiritual" and the passive aspects of any given asian system of healing and martial art then so be it, if they decide to take a walk down a dark alley and they get mugged and beat up, so be it,Although, i would like to think that those who study the esoteric forms of martial arts and the "soft" have enough common sense to NOT walk down a dark alley and to not attract that kind of violence to themselves.
Oh and as for all the statements about buddhism, well not everyone is the USA are buddhists and those who say that they are only say that because they have not yet found a path that suits them personally. unless you are a devout monk at one of the many buddhist churches here in this country, to say you are a buddhist and follow those doctrines, well i think that is a little far fetched. Buddhism seems to be more of a partial mindset within people of this country and is not whole heartedly followed or practiced, much like how certain people claim to be X-tian and dont follow the precepts of those teachings. This is a salad bar culture Silong, we take what we want and leave the rest.

Peace,TWS

[yenhoi]

somwetimes its better if u just stop talking man


No, YOU'RE a black kettle!

:rolleyes:

[SevenStar]

When you take the fight out of the martial arts then all the associated benefits are diminished. So, if your serious about health and character, it's better to fight. :p

that depends on what benefits you are looking for. I can run a person through muay thai training and get them in great shape without them ever setting foot in a ring (I wouldn't but I easily could). lack of fighting does not mean lack of intensity. and since when was fighting necessary for qi/nei gong training?

[SanHeChuan]

lack of fighting does not mean lack of intensity.

I disagree, It has been my experience that those who train to fight train much harder. They have the motivation, that If they don't train hard enough, they'll get their asses kicked. That about as close as we can come to not training hard enough and it's your life.

I've never seen anyone who trains for the health benefits work half as hard as those who are training for a fight.


I can run a person through muay thai training and get them in great shape without them ever setting foot in a ring (I wouldn't but I easily could).

You wouldn't and neither would they. They could but they wouldn't. Putting something on the line, like your ass, is what gives fighters the motivation to train harder.


and since when was fighting necessary for qi/nei gong training?

For me that training is not martial arts, but supplemental to martial arts, and can be done the same regardless of context.

As for character building, it comes not from lectures of virtues or from parables. We learn the best lessons through facing great challenges. There is a word for this but I can't seem to recall. Facing the challenges of; training for, Figting, and dealing with the outcome, is where you truly build character. Seeking your limitations and pushing past them.

In Marine corps training they have a right of passage call the Crucible (http://www.marines.com/page/usmc.jsp?pageId=/page/Detail-XML-Conversion.jsp?pageName=The-Crucible&flashRedirect=true). Three days with little sleep or food, Physical and mental challenges.

[Scott R. Brown]

Not everyone trains to be in top condition. Some train for simple fitness. It does not matter to these people if they have the training intensity of a fighter. We always train harder and more consistently if we have a goal, but that goal need not be fighting. It is the goal that is motivating. While it is true that when one is fighting for their life they will tend to be more intense and focused, it is unnecessary to carry this frame of mind with us when training or just living life. It can even be a foolish waste of emotional energy.

It is helpful to remember it isn't always about how hard you train, but how smart you train. If one trains with maximum intensity too often they are subject to more frequent injury. It is far more valuable to train consistently than intensely.

At any rate 30 mins a few days a week training with a handgun will provide one with far more self-defense benefit than any MA training. The advantage of MA training is the added fitness benefits.

One of my favorite stories is about Shoju and the Master Swordsmen. Shoju was a teacher of the well known Japanese Zen Master Hakuin. On one occasion Shoju observed the training session of a group of master swordsmen. After the training, the swordsmen professed to Shoju their admiration for his understanding of Zen, but doubted that anyone could defeat a master swordsman without surprising him. Shoju responded by inviting the swordsmen to attack him all at once. When they attacked, not one of them was able to strike Shoju, while he rapped each and every one on the head with his fan.

Shoju was a man with NO martial arts training. There was no intense physical training involved in the development of his skill. He had no fear of life or death and was able to perceive with an unobstructed mind. This is what allowed him to defend himself, not years of intense MA training.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Taking the "martial" out of martial arts is fine, just don't call it martial arts anymore or think that you will be able to protect yourself if you need to.

Fighting is about fighting, don't wanna fight, great, just realize you won't be able to fight without fighting.

[Scott R. Brown]

As for character building, it comes not from lectures of virtues or from parables. We learn the best lessons through facing great challenges. Facing the challenges of; training for, Fighting, and dealing with the outcome, is where you truly build character. Seeking your limitations and pushing past them.

This is not quite accurate. Learning about what constitutes “good” character is required for one to even know what they are to be working towards. If one is not taught right from wrong, good from bad and why certain attitudes and behaviors are beneficial or detrimental they have no guide post for their behavior.

Parables are used to illustrate meaning and usefulness of a character quality in a more understandable manner. It is the where the practical application of the virtue is given real world application.

Testing by creating challenges is what measures our progress. Testing reveals our weaknesses and reinforces our strengths. Evaluating the outcome of a fight does not build character if there is no foundation of principles/virtues to begin with and these are taught using lectures and parables. When we understand the benefit of a character quality we are motivated to apply ourselves to develop it. If we do not understand the benefit we are likely to ignore its development.

If an individual has no knowledge of virtue/qualities of character to begin with fighting will merely develop a brutal person, i.e. Mike Tyson! Qualities of character/virtues must not be only taught; we must also understand why they are beneficial characteristics to acquire. We must also learn the means of acquiring those qualities. True understanding of their value comes when we have met numerous challenges and the qualities have demonstrated to us their value through experience.

Fighting is not the only method available for building character and it is not necessary for the building of character. It is the direct experience in our lives of the contrast between success and failure that aid in the development of character. Fighting is unnecessary!

[Scott R. Brown]

Taking the "martial" out of martial arts is fine, just don't call it martial arts anymore or think that you will be able to protect yourself if you need to.

Fighting is about fighting, don't wanna fight, great, just realize you won't be able to fight without fighting.

Combat shooting is not considered a MA, it is considered a sport. However, one will be well skill in self-defense if they were skilled in combat shooting.

By calling an activity a martial ART makes it an ART and not necessarily self-defense. If you want an activity to apply to self-defense then call it "self-defense"!

[PangQuan]

Fighting is unnecessary!

So very true.

Some of the wisest individuals i have ever met know nothing of combat, they simply understand LIFE!

after all....does not every endeavor revolve around life? one must live to act, and one must act to live...so to speak

[NJM]

somwetimes its better if u just stop talking man

other wise
try and get your point across in english

Aww, did he make you use extranoematic reading skills?

[David Jamieson]

fighting unnecessary?

since when?

if anything it's a constant.

imo, better as an individual to be able to than to not be able to.
that way, you increase your chances of keeping your ****.

[SanHeChuan]

I think the argument is starting to slide.

My point is that WITH IN the Context of the Martial arts, whatever your goal is, it will be better achieved with the mentality that you will actually be fighting in the near future.


Not everyone trains to be in top condition. Some train for simple fitness. It does not matter to these people if they have the training intensity of a fighter.

If your goal is for improved fitness, but not peak fitness, you may achieve your goal with half-ass measures. BUT your goal of improved fitness would be better achieved by striving for peak fitness.

That is my point. Not that these things cannot be achieved without the construct of fighting, but that they are better achieved through it.

And yes you can achieve most of these goals out side of the martial arts, but we are talking about within the context of the martial arts.


This is not quite accurate. Learning about what constitutes “good” character is required for one to even know what they are to be working towards. If one is not taught right from wrong, good from bad and why certain attitudes and behaviors are beneficial or detrimental they have no guide post for their behavior.

We are talking about different kinds of Character. I'm talking about the kind that comes through hard work. Discipline, control, restraint, will power, resolve, courage, tenacity, etc...

Your are talking right and wrong. Which I don't believe has to be taught. Anyone capable of any kind of empathy, who can perceive how their actions affect others, will intuitively know right from wrong. What needs to be taught or determinded is whether or not they should care. But that's another discussion.

People send their kids to MCdojos to learn discipline, not charity.

[PangQuan]

My point is that WITH IN the Context of the Martial arts, whatever your goal is, it will be better achieved with the mentality that you will actually be fighting in the near future.

I'll agree with this. Yet i would change the term martial art to something more along the lines of martial skill. Adding art i believe creates too many more roads that can be sought through your practice.

Although im being anal and literal :p


But then, now to take it a bit further. Would the current times decide what your goal in terms of peak skill set and physic for fighting?

for instance, if you KNEW you would be in a melee with weapons, horseback, chariot, bow, etc. wouldnt you need to train totally differently? less stress on hand to hand, more on actual weapon sparring, and what not. PLUS depending on the times you may simply be an archer. You would likely spend the majority of your time at the range and on your horse.

Each time period demanding different pre requisites for excelling in your particular post and expectations.

Of course, all we need be concerned with are the modern times. The rest is dust and ashes.

SO....we have to kind of break it down into the different types of "fighters" there are. Sport, Traditionalists, health enthusiast i feel are the main types of "fighters" or practitioners.

Isnt the prolonged state of your body, mind and spirit quite a battle? Given the motivation, desire, and belief one could assume that they fight this battle on a daily basis. Giving the same type of spirit needed to push to the limits and reach peak performance.

Granted these individuals are dirty hippies and should go live on communes :p (jk of course) (hippies) Given the right circumstances and mindset, anything can be achieved.

though i would consider this type of person described of the select few within the dirty hippie community.

I would however agree that on average, your normal person, would be best to train under the mindset and idea that they WILL encounter violence and combat in the future. And mainly because im a combat enthusiast rather than a health enthusiast, I just dont see how you could practice martial arts with out the primary focus being on combat application and effectiveness......just odd to me. hippies.

[Scott R. Brown]

My point is that WITH IN the Context of the Martial arts, whatever your goal is, it will be better achieved with the mentality that you will actually be fighting in the near future.

It helps to have a goal with a time limit to work towards, but I disagree it is necessary to have a "fight mentality". MA may be viewed as an athletic endeavor and it is the only one of a few that involves fighting. Most other elite athletes reach the fitness level of fighters and many exceed their level without resorting to a "fight mentality". If other athletes are able to reach the peak of their field without resorting to a "fight mentality" it is not necessary for MA. If fighting within a specific context, like the ring, is your goal then practice does make perfect. Fighting within any competitive arena follows rules and these do not always directly apply to self-defense situations. If ones goal is merely fitness then training to fight is not necessary in order to reach peak condition.


That is my point. Not that these things cannot be achieved without the construct of fighting, but that they are better achieved through it.

I don't know, most elite athletes have reached peak condition without fighting. Why can’t a person who trains in the MA? Note that reaching peak fitness is not necessarily the same as reaching peak skill.


And yes you can achieve most of these goals out side of the martial arts, but we are talking about within the context of the martial arts.

This comment is confusing when taken within context with your other comments. Are we talking about fitness within the context of MA? Fighting within the MA? Self-defense within the MA? Or all of the above?

If your goal is to fight then it is best to train by fighting according to the RULES of the competition in which you wish to compete. These rules do not apply to real world self-defense situations in most cases. If your goal is peak fitness then it is best to train to develop fitness; fighting is not necessary. If your goal is self-defense then it is best to train to defend against attacks that are likely to occur in the real world. These forms of attack are not likely to occur within a competitive ring. While hands on practice is frequently necessary, it is not necessary to fight in the traditional sense of pairing off against an opponent with similar training and skills.


We are talking about different kinds of Character. I'm talking about the kind that comes through hard work. Discipline, control, restraint, will power, resolve, courage, tenacity, etc...

Your are talking right and wrong. Which I don't believe has to be taught. Anyone capable of any kind of empathy, who can perceive how their actions affect others, will intuitively know right from wrong. What needs to be taught or determinded is whether or not they should care. But that's another discussion.

People send their kids to MCdojos to learn discipline, not charity.

Unless I misunderstand you, I think you are still a bit off here.

Perhaps I was not quite clear enough here myself. To develop beneficial qualities one must understand which good qualities to develop and which bad qualities to avoid; there is a right way to do things and a wrong way to do things in order to accomplish ones purpose. This knowledge is taught to the individual either directly through a coach or instructor or by direct experience. Some people will not learn them even if taught and these individuals will never reach the peak of their endeavor. Others will have all the necessary qualities and while they may reach their own personal potential will not reach the peak in their field because of other influencing limitations.

Character that results from hard work such as the qualities you have listed: discipline, control, restraint, will power, resolve, courage, tenacity, etc... may all be developed by applying oneself to any endeavor. It isn’t the field of study that matters it is the testing through adversity that develops these qualities. Every elite athlete knows this, as well as every elite musician, artist, and professionals of all fields, even people who work with their hands such as carpenters fishermen, cowboys, sailors, etc. develop these qualities. It is overcoming adversity/challenges that builds these qualities of character not only fighting.


fighting unnecessary?

since when?

if anything it's a constant.

imo, better as an individual to be able to than to not be able to.
that way, you increase your chances of keeping your ****.

Try training with a gun. It is a more efficient way to keep your stuff! With a gun weight class is equalized. It takes less time to develop the necessary skill and you run a lesser risk of injury to yourself. Most of the time there is even less risk of injury to the bad guy since most people are not foolish enough to attack someone with a gun. The ones who are that foolish would most likely hurt you if you didn’t have one anyway.

[SanHeChuan]

Most other elite athletes reach the fitness level of fighters and many exceed their level without resorting to a "fight mentality".

If they are competitive with in their sport then they do have a "fighting mentality".


If ones goal is merely fitness then training to fight is not necessary in order to reach peak condition.

Taking MA isn't necessary in order to reach peak condition, but if you do choose that road.... I've never seen a hobbyist at peak physical conditioning, unless they got it from some other source, but really I haven't seen that either. Only MA I've ever seen at peak physical condition where competitive fighters. If your using MA as vehicle for peak physical condition, might as well go all out, and train like a fighter.


I don't know, most elite athletes have reached peak condition without fighting.

But they are competitive which is the equivalent to fighting in MA.


Are we talking about fitness within the context of MA? Fighting within the MA? Self-defense within the MA? Or all of the above?

All of the above. To ague that non-MA reach their goals without fighting doesn't mean anything, they are non-MA. If you use MA to reach your goals, then there is the easy way and they hard way. And your going to get better results the hard way.


If your goal is self-defense then it is best to train to defend against attacks that are likely to occur in the real world.

If your goal is self defense the minimum is not good enough. The street is not predictable, in order to adapt to what ever may come, you NEED to be in the best shape you can manage, you NEED to have to will (etc ) to fight through pain (or whatever), you NEED to develop all your skills to the best of your ability. The ring may limit which techniques you can use but many of the skills you develop are universal, like better timing, that ARE necessary for self-defense.


It is overcoming adversity/challenges that builds these qualities of character not only fighting.

Nothing more adverse than getting punched in the face. :D You are likely to face more adversity/challenges training to fight and fighting, than not, in the MA. Hence better character. :p


Try training with a gun.

Guns have limits too. And they don't build fitness, whether you were seeking it or not. :p

[Shaolinlueb]

can someone like summarize this a sentance to for each paragraph? i got a.d.d. and cant read that long on a computer.

[SanHeChuan]

Well I said whatever your goal's in MA are, you'll reach them better if you train to fight. :cool:

Then he was all like, non-MA get results without fighting. :confused:

And then I was all like, yeah, there non-MA. :rolleyes:

Goi it? :D

Oh look, Shinny (http://www.adrants.com/images/026_celeb_scarlett_johansson_006.jpg)! ;)

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi SanHeChuan,


Well I said whatever your goal's in MA are, you'll reach them better if you train to fight.

Then he was all like, non-MA get results without fighting.

And then I was all like, yeah, there non-MA.

This was stated by SevenStar: “lack of fighting does not mean lack of intensity.”

You replied


It has been my experience that those who train to fight train much harder. They have the motivation, that If they don't train hard enough, they'll get their asses kicked. That about as close as we can come to not training hard enough and it's your life.

You are incorrect here! Professional athletes and many amateur athletes train just as hard as fighters. This has been my argument. It is immaterial whether someone is a non-MA. You claimed that those who train to fight train harder. This is false. If any athlete doesn’t train hard enough they risk losing. While SevenStar’s comment is about MA this is immaterial. If a non-MA is able to train as hard as a MA fighter and reach peak condition, then so can a non-fighting MA. THAT is my point and you have not refuted it. Redirecting the argument is not a refutation!


If they are competitive with in their sport then they do have a "fighting mentality".

While the fighting mentality is a competitive mentality, the competitive mentality is not necessarily a fighting mentality! Not all competitive activities involve the domination and injury of an opponent. While competitiveness can be considered the fight to win, it is different than “fighting to win”. The mind set is very different.


Only MA I've ever seen at peak physical condition where competitive fighters. If your using MA as vehicle for peak physical condition, might as well go all out, and train like a fighter.

There is no requirement for anyone taking MA to compete or fight in order to train with the same intensity as a competitive fighter. That is your requirement. Your values are your values. They are not shared by the many other MA or athletes. No one is required to adhere to your opinion. There is nothing to stop anyone from training intensely for the simple love of training. Yes! There really are people out there to who love to train merely for training’s sake. Some people like to challenge themselves and have no desire or need to dominate others. It is absolutely possible to acquire peak conditioning and train with maximum intensity in the MA without fighting/competing. The fact you don’t know anyone who trains that way does not demonstrate they do not exist, only that your experience is limited.

I didn’t say they don’t train like fighters only that don’t train to compete in fighting. Why would someone NOT want to fight? Well, time constraints, age, present injuries, avoidance of injuries, family, no emotional need for it, just to name a few.


But they are competitive which is the equivalent to fighting in MA.

The competitive spirit is not necessarily the same as a fighting spirit. A fighting spirit seeks to dominate others; a competitive spirit in some cases does involve the desire to dominate of others, but it is not required. The competitive spirit may just as easily involve overcoming self-imposed challenges. For some the competitive motivation is not to dominate and/or defeat others, but the improvement of oneself. Even within a fight this attitude is preferable as was demonstrated by Shoju who defeated the master swordsmen. He defeated the swordsmen as an objective goal or purpose and not with the intent to dominate or injure. To Shoju it was not a fight and neither was it competitive; it was a demonstration of an unobstructed mind. There was a competitive fighting spirit on the part of the master swordsmen and they were all soundly defeated by one with no competitive spirit at all. This non-competitive spirit was also recommended in order to attain true mastery of the MA by two of the greatest swordsmen of all time, Musashi Miyamoto and Yagyu Munenori. Musashi competed in over 60 duels and wrote that true mastery came not from defeating others, but from developing personal insight, which is the unobstructed mind of Shoju. While an unobstructed mind made one essentially undefeatable in competitions, the fighting spirit was found to be an inhibition to peak performance. Yagyu generally avoided competitions. As the swordmaster to the Shogun he was not permitted to participate in needless swordplay. But he is reputed to have defeated multiple opponents at one time in battle as well as accomplishing other notable feats in demonstrations. Both these masters had real world experience beyond that of any competitive MA today and their recommendation is to train with intense focus, but the overall purpose is to overcome ones internal obstacles to mastery and acquire an unobstructed mind. One is to compete without concern for victory or defeat. This attitude frees one’s mind from obstacles that impede performance.


If your goal is self defense the minimum is not good enough. The street is not predictable, in order to adapt to what ever may come, you NEED to be in the best shape you can manage, you NEED to have to will (etc ) to fight through pain (or whatever), you NEED to develop all your skills to the best of your ability. The ring may limit which techniques you can use but many of the skills you develop are universal, like better timing, that ARE necessary for self-defense.

I am afraid you are incorrect again. Not all skills are universal and actually some ring skills are detrimental, such as taking an opponent to the ground. This has been discussed many times and we need not go into it here. I will concede it is of value to know how to avoid and escape from grappling situations.

Peak condition is a relative term. Peak conditioning for competitive fighting is different from peak conditioning for self-defense. It is not required to be in peak competitive fighting condition for most self-defense scenarios unless one is participating regularly in bar fights or soccer ruffian rumbles. Even in these scenarios peak conditioning, while a benefit, is not required. Years ago I knew of a prison inmate in his mid to late 50’s who was a former boxer. He was not in competitive condition and he did not train any longer. We was undefeated in prison brawls and ALL of his adversaries were knocked out. One of my co-workers asked him how he did it. He said he just covered until he saw an opening and then tagged the opponent in the temple. He didn’t dance around or bob and weave. He was patient and awaited the right time and used strategy and tactics over conditioning against younger and more fit opponents. Prison brawling is not competitive fighting, but it is brutal beyond what most people will encounter in the real world. If an out of shape boxer in his older years can defend himself against young and fit criminals then so can a MA who is not competitive and not in your required peak condition defend himself. Before you say, “well he has training giving hits and taking hits”, no one said that a non-competitive MA wouldn’t train giving and taking hits. My argument has been they do not NEED to compete or have your required peak conditioning or fighting spirit to effectively protect themselves.


Nothing more adverse than getting punched in the face. You are likely to face more adversity/challenges training to fight and fighting, than not. Hence better character.

Nice try!! How about: dying of cancer, losing a limb, having a stroke, having your child die, having your wife or daughter raped, having a family member murdered, having a child kidnapped, losing your job and house, being a firefighter, a paramedic or a policeman. Fighting is child’s play next to life’s REAL challenges. These are the measure of ones character and not the ability to physically dominate another person. I have had some of these experiences and know of others that have had at least one of these experiences occur to them.

I looked at your profile and you are still too young to know what you are talking about. Life has apparently not happened much to you yet. It isn’t fighting that builds character it is meeting life’s REAL adversities that forges a person’s character. If you have had some of these REAL challenges in life you will understand, if you haven’t then you are still too inexperienced to know what you are talking about.

[SPJ]

Oh look, Shinny (http://www.adrants.com/images/026_celeb_scarlett_johansson_006.jpg)! ;)


all that glitters/shines may not be gold.

and true gold will stand the trial of fires.

meaning all that exercise/practice may not be MA related or good for fighting.

if MA related then it will stand the trial of actual fighting in the ring or street.

:D :) :cool:

[SevenStar]

I disagree, It has been my experience that those who train to fight train much harder. They have the motivation, that If they don't train hard enough, they'll get their asses kicked. That about as close as we can come to not training hard enough and it's your life.

And it has been my experience that you can push a person to their limit whether they are competing or not. Yes, the one training to fight *sometimes* has the motivation - there are fighters who still slack during training camp - but in a competitive environment such as those found in any sport fighting class, you will receive more than adequeate intensity to fight, both in the ring and the street.


I've never seen anyone who trains for the health benefits work half as hard as those who are training for a fight.

when you are in my area next, I will show you several. We have guys who have no desire to compete, but roll and spar just as hard as the others, for the simple fact that they enjoy it.



As for character building, it comes not from lectures of virtues or from parables. We learn the best lessons through facing great challenges. There is a word for this but I can't seem to recall. Facing the challenges of; training for, Figting, and dealing with the outcome, is where you truly build character. Seeking your limitations and pushing past them.

I don't disagree with that at all. I would also add that LOSING teaches you most about yourself.


In Marine corps training they have a right of passage call the Crucible (http://www.marines.com/page/usmc.jsp?pageId=/page/Detail-XML-Conversion.jsp?pageName=The-Crucible&flashRedirect=true). Three days with little sleep or food, Physical and mental challenges.

lol, three days without sleep sounds like my typical week. thurs - sun I really have no time to sleep.

[SevenStar]

This is not quite accurate. Learning about what constitutes “good” character is required for one to even know what they are to be working towards. If one is not taught right from wrong, good from bad and why certain attitudes and behaviors are beneficial or detrimental they have no guide post for their behavior.

Parables are used to illustrate meaning and usefulness of a character quality in a more understandable manner. It is the where the practical application of the virtue is given real world application.

Testing by creating challenges is what measures our progress. Testing reveals our weaknesses and reinforces our strengths. Evaluating the outcome of a fight does not build character if there is no foundation of principles/virtues to begin with and these are taught using lectures and parables. When we understand the benefit of a character quality we are motivated to apply ourselves to develop it. If we do not understand the benefit we are likely to ignore its development.

If an individual has no knowledge of virtue/qualities of character to begin with fighting will merely develop a brutal person, i.e. Mike Tyson! Qualities of character/virtues must not be only taught; we must also understand why they are beneficial characteristics to acquire. We must also learn the means of acquiring those qualities. True understanding of their value comes when we have met numerous challenges and the qualities have demonstrated to us their value through experience.

Fighting is not the only method available for building character and it is not necessary for the building of character. It is the direct experience in our lives of the contrast between success and failure that aid in the development of character. Fighting is unnecessary!


I agree with this as well.

[SanHeChuan]

Professional athletes and many amateur athletes train just as hard as fighters. This has been my argument. It is immaterial whether someone is a non-MA.

It is completely material! It's like saying a track runner doesn't have to run, because he can just do ballet. I'm not comparing Non-MA to MA, I'm comparing MA to MA.

If you say Professional athletes get fit without fighting one more time I'm going to have a fit! :D

In this case you are defined by what you do, If your using MA as a vehicle to get whatever result, then what non-MA people do doesn't matter. You are bound by the constraints of MA. They aren't using MA you ARE.

If you want to use non-MA as an example then my point would be like this, If you want to become a better runner, you should train like an olympian.


If any athlete doesn't’t train hard enough they risk losing.

A non-fighting MA risks nothing. MA and fighting = athlete and competition.

You'd be better off trying to make the argument that non-competition based athletes reach peak condition, so non-competition MA can too. At least that would make sense. :p


While the fighting mentality is a competitive mentality, the competitive mentality is not necessarily a fighting mentality! Not all competitive activities involve the domination and injury of an opponent. While competitiveness can be considered the fight to win, it is different than “fighting to win”. The mind set is very different.

I disagree with your definitions. They are the same to me. Especially when talking about the training. And that's what I'm talking about here. It's the training that's important. Whether or not you actually compete is immaterial as long as you are training with the same intent.

You can fight all you want but if you don't put the effort in to the training your not going to get the results I'm talking about.


The competitive spirit is not necessarily the same as a fighting spirit. A fighting spirit seeks to dominate others

If you are talking about real street fighting then the fighting spirit is to survive, to overcome an imposed dominance. If you are talking about doing what ever it takes to defend your-self, that's an application mentality not a training mentality, and doesn't apply to sport fighting or self-defense training.

In sport fighting the spirit is no different then any other sport. I compete and I don't even seek to win, let alone to hear the lamentations of their women.


It is absolutely possible to acquire peak conditioning and train with maximum intensity in the MA without fighting/competing.

I didn't say it wasn't possible, I just said it was a better vehicle to achieve your goals.


Not all skills are universal and actually some ring skills are detrimental, such as taking an opponent to the ground.

I never said, all. I'm talking timing your talking double legs, if you don't see the difference I don't have the time to explain it. I can only handle one discussion at a time.


It is not required to be in peak competitive fighting condition for most self-defense scenarios unless one is participating regularly in bar fights or soccer ruffian rumbles.

No it's not necessary, but it helps. You can't possibly argue that being in better physical condition doesn't improve your chances of success. That has been my point, it's not necessary to train like a fighter, you just get better results when you do.


Even in these scenarios peak conditioning, while a benefit, is not required.

See that's what I said.


My argument has been they do not NEED to compete or have your required peak conditioning or fighting spirit to effectively protect themselves.

I never said they did. They would better off though.


How about: dying of cancer

Does MA cause cancer? Then WTF are you talking about. I've been talking about MA, and what happen in MA, and how MA can improve your abilities relative to MA. You continue to argue about how life is better than MA, but that's not what I'm saying. I brought up character building because people put their kids in MA to learn character, should people give their kids cancer to learn character?


Fighting is child’s play next to life’s REAL challenges.

So, I'm talking about MA. I can't argue that I'm older, you have the math on that one, way to go you win. AND I'm NOT going to have some ****ing contest to see who, life has kicked in the nuts harder, to try and prove my point here ABOUT MA.


I didn't’t say they don’t train like fighters only that don’t train to compete in fighting.

I didn't say that they had to fight, only that they should train like fighters, so we are in agreement here. Thank you for validation my point. I win :p

Seven Star


We have guys who have no desire to compete, but roll and spar just as hard as the others, for the simple fact that they enjoy it.

I don't disagree with that, nor does that contradict anything I've said. They are training the same as the fighters, right?


lol, three days without sleep sounds like my typical week. thurs - sun I really have no time to sleep.

It's just a wee bit more than that. Even so I didn't think it was all that hard, still I was almost moved to tears at the end of it though. :rolleyes:

[David Jamieson]

Try training with a gun. It is a more efficient way to keep your stuff! With a gun weight class is equalized. It takes less time to develop the necessary skill and you run a lesser risk of injury to yourself. Most of the time there is even less risk of injury to the bad guy since most people are not foolish enough to attack someone with a gun. The ones who are that foolish would most likely hurt you if you didn’t have one anyway.

I can't carry a gun where I live. But I can take my Kungfu everywhere.

I do have firearms training both in hunting and in practical shooting. So I see where you're coming from, but outside of the good ol usa, there aren't a lot of c&c permits available to folks around the world....and if I lived in a warzone, I would carry a gun, shoot people with it and STILL train my kungfu. :)

[SanHeChuan]

OK wait, stop, back up, slow down, rewind. :D

If feel I got a little addle brained trying to untangle that tangly web of irrelevancies. :p

Let me restate my original point for my own clarity at least. :eek:

My point was that whatever your goal in the Martial arts, whether, self-dense, health, character building, or sport competition, Your goals would be better reached if you train to compete, and in the cases of character building and sport, you actually competed.

I did not say that they could not be reached without such training, but that they would be improved by such training. :rolleyes:




If you train as hard and with similar methods as those who seek competition you will see better health than you would if you didn't.

If you are seeking peak fitness through the Martial arts and you do not train like a competitive fighter would, using I don't know lets say, strenuous exercise, you won't get far. You may get better health, but not peak.



If you seek to build character through your involvement in the Martial Arts, you will see more challenges and adversity as a competitive fighter than you otherwise would face in the Martial Arts.

If you seek to build character through Martial Arts without any involvement in competition you may see some success, but competing increases your challenges and therefor the probability of developing better character.



If you seek self-defense, the improved fitness, mentality, and skills you learn through competition will give you a better chance at success than you would otherwise have.




At NO point did I say the Martial arts build, health, character, or anything else Better than non Martial arts. :rolleyes:




Fighting is the core, the seed, the truth of all Martial Arts, Whatever other benefits that are perceived to arise from the training of Martial Arts, stem from the actual training of Fighting inherent within the art.

So, when ever you weaken or deny the Fighting within the Martial arts you also weaken the associated benefits of its practice.

[sanjuro_ronin]

A few things:

If you wanna be a fighter, you gotta fight, not much of a gray area there.
Competition gives you an extra mental edge that you MAY not get from regular bouts in the gym/school, but it isn't 100% needed to make you a fighter.
Intent and mindset are the keys.

If you don't wanna be a fighter, then MA are just as good and just as bad as any other form of physical fitness.

Just realize one thing, if you are not fighting ( hard contact sparring and such) you truly aren't doing the "martial" part of the martial arts.

[SanHeChuan]

Just realize one thing, if you are not fighting ( hard contact sparring and such) you truly aren't doing the "martial" part of the martial arts.

It's tempting to just draw the line in the sand there, but I don't think that's entirely true. You may be doing the "martial" better, or simply more of it...

[sanjuro_ronin]

It's tempting to just draw the line in the sand there, but I don't think that's entirely true. You may be doing the "martial" better, or simply more of it...

Semantics aside, perhaps if i add "practical" it would be more correct then?